A great day out for all the family, thoroughly enjoyed by one and all.

This was the verdict of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) on its “All-Russian Day of Action”, called “in Support of the People of Crimea and the Re-unification of Crimea and Russia, and Against the Persecution of Supporters of Friendship and Union with Russia by the Illegitimate Banderist Government of New-Ukraine.”

The nineteen slogans raised by the CPRF for the Day of Action, staged last Saturday (22nd March), included:

“We Will Not Abandon Our Kith and Kin!”, “Fascism Will Not Pass!”, “USA – Out of Ukraine!”, “NATO equals NAZI!”, “Berkut – an Example of Courage, Firmness and Righteousness!”, “Ukraine Will be Soviet!”, “Long Live the USSR!”, and “Let Us Defend the Victory of Our Fathers and Grandfathers!”

Given that the days of the USSR – when only state-sanctioned placards and slogans were allowed on demonstrations – are long in the past, participants in the Day of Action in different cities were able to “embellish” the official slogans with some of their own:

“Yankee Go Home!”, “We Went as Far as Berlin (i.e. in the Second World War) – We Will Go as Far as Washington!”, “EU, USA – Wipe Away Your Spittle!”, “We Defended Crimea – We Will Defend the Balkans As Well!”

Leaving aside the slightly tasteless “Crimea has Returned From Deportation to Russia” (given that it was actually the indigenous Crimean Tatars who suffered mass deportation from Crimea during the last war), other DIY slogans included:

“Crimea Was, Is and Will Be Russian!”, “Crimea – Welcome Home!”, “Long Live the Russian Spring!”, “No to the Euro-Banderists!”, “No to Global Capitalism in Ukraine!”, “One Country, One People!” “Victory Is Ours!” and “KPRF – For Russians! For Crimea!”

It would also be remiss not to mention the closing words of the standard resolution passed (unanimously) at the larger rallies staged on the Day of Action:

“Let the proponents of various brands of ‘universal human values’ and their foreign patrons know: Russians do not surrender! Russians do not abandon their kith and kin! We were born in the USSR! We are with you, our Slav brothers and sisters! We will bring back a renewed Soviet Union! Forwards, to the victory of socialism!”

The tone of the speeches at the rallies held on the Day of Action had been set by Gennady Zyuganov, First Secretary of the KPRF, the previous evening in a round-table discussion broadcast by the Russia 1 television channel:

“The situation today is reminiscent of the victorious May of 1945, of the launch of the world’s first cosmonaut, Yuri Gagarin. … I always went to pay homage in this sacred land (Crimea) because it is indeed sacred, watered by blood.”

“In early May we will commemorate the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Sevastopol and Crimea from German-fascist aggressors. We must therefore be proud that again we did not allow the Banderists, the Nazis, into this sacred place.”

(The irony of Zyuganov making such anti-fascist strictures in a round-table discussion which included LDPR leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky – well-known for his own racism, ultra-nationalism and pro-fascist leanings – appeared to be lost on him. Or, more likely, he just didn’t care.)

The same euphoria about the results of the Crimean (bogus) referendum and the ‘return’ of Crimea to Russia permeated the rallies of the Day of Action.

“A historic hour for Russia and our people,” declared the opening speaker at the Moscow rally. For speakers at the rally in Tomsk the referendum had been “a historic event, a restoration of justice.” In Ulyanovsk speakers hailed the referendum as a victory for “the real Ukrainian patriots” and for the unity of “the fraternal Slav peoples.”

In Krasnodar speakers paid special tribute to their local Cossack comrades: “We cannot fail to notice the great role played by our compatriots – the Kuban Cossacks, who helped their neighbours in their hour of need.”

(That would be the same Cossacks who, always ready to lend a helping hand, had beaten up members of Pussy Riot in nearby Sochi only three weeks earlier.)

But for many speakers at the different rallies Crimea’s “return from deportation” was only the start of the tasks now at hand. There was still unfinished business in Ukraine. And there was even more unfinished business in Russia itself.

According to a speaker in Rostov-on-Don, the Ukrainian government was “a fascist junta, supported by the European Union and the USA, which will do everything to destabilise Russia as well.”

In Moscow a member of the Presidium of the Central Committee of KPRF explained that it was not a popular revolution but Western intervention which had installed the new Ukrainian government. It was therefore “a government of occupation.”

Consequently, another speaker at the Moscow rally explained: “Now we must do everything possible to support the population of the eastern regions of Ukraine which need our solidarity. We cannot allow fascist youth to spread their ideas in the eastern territories of Ukraine.”

“We must defend the Russians in the south-east of Ukraine, we must not allow the Banderists to remain in power in Ukraine,” a speaker at the Kuryan rally put it more bluntly.

In Russia itself, it was important to maintain the momentum and the dynamic unleashed by the ‘reunification’ of Crimea and Russia.

According to a speaker at the Moscow rally, the significance of recent events in Crimea was that “we did not give in to the pressure of the Banderists, the European Union and NATO, who threatened us with all the means at their disposal. This resolute stand continues to inspire all our people.”

“A revival of Russian self-consciousness is underway,” he continued, “a revival of the country’s greatness. Russia is arising from its knees, at a geopolitical level and also at the level of spirituality, a revival of the Russian world.”

“The United States created Al-Qaida, they helped the Taliban, and today they are sponsoring the Banderists. But the boomerang has already returned to the aggressor on more than one occasion. … Whoever approaches Russia with the sword will die by the sword!”

The following speaker developed the theme of reviving Russian power: “Now it is time to impose order on Russia itself: to cleanse the power structures of the Western fifth columnists, and to unite all patriots under the banner of the KPRF.”

According to a speaker in Ulyanovsk, it was time to put an end to “attempts to play down the leading role played by the Communist Party in the economic development of Soviet Russia, in strengthening the country’s defensive capabilities, and in organizing the defeat of Nazi Germany.”

In the interests of “national unity”, the speaker continued, the Russian government should put an end to “the wholesale disparagement of the history of the Soviet period.” Apparently unaware of the meaning of the word “irony”, he concluded: “Having a monopoly over state politics can lead to the collapse of the state.”

In Murmansk speakers called for “strengthening the military power of our armed forces, and the morale of our army and navy,” for “supporting with all out strength our army and our sons,” and for avoiding “dependence on the West, whether it be for food, for medicines, for the economy, or for anything else.”

For one of the KPRF speakers in Moscow, the imposition of sanctions, toothless as they were, was almost to be welcomed:

“If they exclude Russia from the World Trade Organisation, the day should be declared a public holiday. … We need to rebuild our own industry, fill the shelves of our shops with domestic produce, and create (trading) unions and blocks with countries friendly to us.”

“In the light of recent events and external threats,” another speaker at the rally also emphasised “the necessity of reviving domestic industry.” After all, “on the eve of the Great Patriotic War the industrialization and collectivisation which were carried out made possible breaking the backbone of fascism and achieving the Great Victory.”

In Tyumen, where the rally opened with a rendition of “Sevastopol Waltz” and concluded with the singing of “Black Sea – Russian Sea”, the KPRF Regional Secretary demanded “the introduction of sanctions against America and the European Union. The time is long overdue for developing our own industry and leaving the World Trade Organisation.”

Stalinist nostalgics who missed last Saturday’s bacchanalia of Russian nationalism masquerading as socialism and anti-fascism need not despair. Although on a smaller scale, the KPRF has organized an event guaranteed to give vent to the same politics:

“24th March – 15th anniversary of NATO aggression against Yugoslavia – assemble at 1.00pm outside the German Embassy in Moscow – followed by a picket at the Serb Embassy, in solidarity with the fraternal Serbian people, victim of NATO aggression. All patriotic movements and unions are welcome to attend.”

Babssaid,

Katrin Wilson
G’day everyone. I’m in the middle of a debate with leftists about the death toll under Mao. Can anyone recommend some good historians, please? (there wasn’t much in the Marxist-Leninist page)
Like · · Share · 22 March at 21:47
2 people like this.

Jannah Leah Where is this debate going on?
22 March at 21:47 · Like

Katrin Wilson I’ll tag you in the post, OK!
22 March at 21:48 · Like · 1

Nick Giannone III He cloned himself to be able to satisfy his bloodlust
22 March at 21:53 · Like · 13

Mat Floor A good point to bring up (because they will bring in famine) is that China suffered millennia of famines, but they have never had a single famine since the completion of the great leap forward
22 March at 21:54 · Like · 2

Francis DeGrader Bodhayan Roy If I remember correct it was about 15 million in the great leap forward which a famine happened
22 March at 21:54 · Like · 1

Gordon Copeland The Workers Party of Korea, the Korean Social Democratic Party, and the Chondoist Chongu Party.
17 March at 19:23 · Like · 2

Zulu Khosa No parties from the center or right?
17 March at 19:24 · Like

Kyle McGeehan ………..
17 March at 19:24 · Like · 5

Kyle McGeehan are you supposed to be a communist?
17 March at 19:24 · Like · 5

Daniel Sullivan ” Last week? Kim Jong Un was rambling as a head of state since Kim Jong ill died and that was last year.”

Oh. OK. Then all the news agencies that said he was elected last week must be wrong. I’m sorry for believing the BBC, CNN, etc., etc. instead of you.
17 March at 19:24 · Like

Gordon Copeland No, Kim Jong-Il died in 2011. He was elected then, but he had been tutored in statesmanship and Marxism-Leninism since he was young and in military school.

No, exploitation is outlawed in the DPRK.
17 March at 19:25 · Like · 1

Zulu Khosa You NK lovers didn’t tell me why don’t you move to the heaven? Scared of prison camps?
17 March at 19:25 · Like

Daniel Sullivan ^ He also was re-elected last week. I’m reasonably sure of this.
17 March at 19:25 · Like

Gordon Copeland For clarification, Kim Jong-Un was elected last week because he was elected as a deputy to the SPA for Paektusan Constituency No. 111 in addition to his post as the First Chairman of the National Defense Commission.
17 March at 19:25 · Like · 2

Gordon Copeland He serves in both posts now.
17 March at 19:26 · Like · 2

Kyle McGeehan can we ban this guy?
17 March at 19:26 · Like · 3

Zulu Khosa Why because I oppose you? Amazing.
17 March at 19:26 · Like

Daniel Sullivan “can we ban this guy?”

Yeah, I think so.
17 March at 19:26 · Like · 5

Gordon Copeland That would be swell.

For the record, I read Nietzsche when I was younger. Most of his writings are bland and tiresome idealism.
17 March at 19:26 · Like · 2

Gordon Copeland You aren’t engaging in good faith.
17 March at 19:26 · Like · 1

Daniel Sullivan “Why because I oppose you? Amazing.”

Sure, sure. There’s NO POSSIBLE other reason we would ban you than that. You’re an angel, completely undeserving of any condemnation. It MUST be oppression.
17 March at 19:27 · Like · 3

Gordon Copeland Zulu, I’d be happy to answer questions if you’re done imagining and want to know some actual information.
17 March at 19:27 · Like · 1

Kyle McGeehan damn if there’s no one like zulu in the dprk I really should move there
17 March at 19:28 · Like · 4

Vika Sinclair I’ll defect to the DPRK in a heartbeat. Working in a collective farm and coming home early to my lovely family without a worry about healthcare or rent or paying for school tuition would be real swell.
17 March at 19:29 · Like · 4

Vika Sinclair I’ve read enough about Juche and DPRK to know they are definitely my comrades and are on a stable and independent socialist road.

LOL “they are bad and scary and not communist because no have western capitalist website facebook” Just nope.
17 March at 19:33 · Like · 3

Jannah Leah About the parties in North Korea: even if it was a single party state how does that differ from capitalism exactly? The multiple parties in capitalist countries might as well only be one since they all serve the ruling class rather than the workers.
17 March at 19:34 · Like · 5

Jannah Leah As for Juche, I don’t consider it Marxism-Leninism, but it is still a form of socialism.
17 March at 19:35 · Like

Vika Sinclair I’ve heard people say the US has a “demo-republican party” lol
17 March at 19:35 · Like · 2

Jannah Leah Not entirely related, but there has been socialist countries with multiple parties. Apparently the DDR did so I don’t see it as far-fetched that North Korea also would.
17 March at 19:37 · Edited · Like

Gordon Copeland It’s a derivation of Marxism-Leninism, so you sort of have to be educated about the intricacies of Marxism-Leninism to get a grasp on it. It actually wouldn’t make much sense without Marxism-Leninism, although it is independent of it because it addresses separate philosophical questions.

They teach basic Marxism and Leninism in their schools, for instance. Dialectical Materialism is a part of their philosophical programs. The girl I spoke to from the DPRK talked with me briefly about dialectical materialism.
17 March at 19:39 · Like · 4

Matt Terialism Personally I support Zulu’s being allowed to remain in this group. He’s ignorant as fuck regarding the DPRK, but we need to defend the DPRK. His ignorant comments about the DPRK give us a good opportunity to defend the DPRK.
17 March at 19:50 · Like

Vika Sinclair There are plenty of comrades in this group who don’t like the DPRK but are willing to learn. Zulu here is just a troll.
17 March at 19:52 · Like · 4

Gordon Copeland I’ve talked with people who were initially hostile to the DPRK and became more moderate and eventually supported it. I’ve sort of gotten to the point where I can tell by how people talk if they’re willing to learn new facts.

I’ve told him plenty. He’s useful because he introduces the topic, but he’s unhelpful because his mind is slammed shut. He’s just a troll. Others will come who want to learn. They come in droves whenever the DPRK is in the news.
17 March at 19:53 · Like · 2

Daniel Sullivan “Zulu here is just a troll.”

Yeah. Sorry. For me, this was the bottom line. Telling us to move to heaven if we think the DPRK is so great… Seriously.
17 March at 19:53 · Like · 2

Matt Terialism Eh, alright…I don’t care enough about his presence it defend it tooth and nail or anything…maybe I’m just a softy. The fact that a large part of the “communist” movement is anti-DPRK is something we have to deal with unfortunately.
17 March at 19:55 · Like · 2

Vika Sinclair It is indeed unfortunate, but the more questions are asked about the DPRK the more I get to learn about it myself.
17 March at 19:57 · Like · 1

Gordon Copeland Interesting factoid: The DPRK constitutionally guarantees asylum to anyone who is persecuted or in danger because they are struggling for socialism or for independence and the like.

From Chapter V of their constitution:
“Article 80:
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea shall grant the right of asylum to foreign nationals persecuted for struggling for peace and democracy, national independence and socialism or for the freedom of scientific and cultural pursuits.”
17 March at 19:57 · Like · 4

Daniel Sullivan “The fact that a large part of the “communist” movement is anti-DPRK is something we have to deal with unfortunately.”

That’s true, of course. But I don’t think he’s any part of the communist movement, though. Based on the arguments he was making and what was visible of his profile, I don’t think he’s a commie at all.
17 March at 19:58 · Like · 3

Matt Terialism Also I’d like to point out that Juche vs socialism is a false dichotomy. Juche is ideology, and socialism is concrete property relations. The degree to which Juche is considered a pro-socialist ideology by us isn’t the same thing as whether the DPRK has a socialist economy or not.
17 March at 20:03 · Edited · Like · 2

Matt Terialism Move to heaven? Lol, I missed that remark. That wasn’t very nice.
17 March at 20:12 · Like

Alex Henderson Can we consider the DPRK being apart of the communist movement though? I don’t see any indications that link Korean socialism with the struggle to advance to communism. I can see the great progress their system has made, but unfortunately the essence of the Juche ideology is “loyalty towards the leader.” Kim Jong Il has even stated this strict loyalty as the, “highest expression of communist morality”, yet an everlasting rule by man over man runs contrary to the aims of communists.
17 March at 20:33 · Like

Gordon Copeland No, it’s not. You and I had a discussion where we talked about how you ripped quotes out of context and expressed a dogmatist understanding.

As I’ve said before about the Juche Idea:

Juche is, in layman’s terms, a derivation of Marxism-Leninism with Maoist influences. It was first introduced by Kim Il-Sung at the Meeting of Leading Personnel of the Young Communist League and the Anti-Imperialist Youth League held at Kalun in June 1930.

It is primarily concerned with the laws of the social movement and the development of socialist ideology under the socialist socio-economic system. Marxism-Leninism, as well as Dialectical and Historical Materialism, are assumed by this ideology, so you should have some knowledge about these topics if you want to learn about the Juche Idea.

Kim Jong-Il talks about the foundations of Marxism-Leninism inherent in the Korean revolutionary philosophies and ideologies in ‘On Correctly Understanding the Originality of Kimilsungism':

“Kimilsungism was founded and has been developed in the course of safeguarding and embodying the ideological and theoretical achievements of Marxism-Leninism. The Juche Idea itself is an idea discovered in the process of the revolutionary struggle waged under the banner of Marxism-Leninism; it is an idea which has opposed all trends of idealism and metaphysics and strictly adhered to the materialistic and dialectic stand. The revolutionary theory of Kimilsungism is also a theory which was founded and enriched in the course of protecting the revolutionary quintessence of Marxist-Leninist theory from bourgeois and opportunist theories and creatively applying and developing it in line with the requirements of the revolutionary practice of our times.”

The Juche Idea is concerned primarily with elucidating the attributes of man which drive social movement. These are defined as independence, creativity, and consciousness, which complement and require each other. These attributes are explained bit by bit, shown to differentiate man from animals through his conscious, creative activity which frees him from the fetters of nature and society by advancing in the progressive struggle for communism.

It has absolutely nothing to do with “loyalty to the leader”. That is an adorable caricature which has next to no connection to reality. You either read a quote ripped out of context or heard about it second-hand.
17 March at 20:42 · Edited · Like · 2

Gordon Copeland Basically, instead of looking for “indications”, you should be carrying out an in-depth investigation.
17 March at 20:42 · Like · 3

Alex Henderson So Juche opposes all trends of idealism and metaphysics? Considering man as an individual abstraction is purely idealistic, especially if you assume that the history of social development is that of man’s independence. Dialectical and Historical Materialism, which you referred to, reject such an abstraction. The real basis of every social order is the role played by certain modes of production: “It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness.” The grounds for socialism are developed on the basis of objective laws of development, not by the subjective inclination of leaders. “Socialism as scientifically systematized by the great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung is man-centered socialism and socialism centered on the masses.” “Man-centered socialism is incompatible with the core precepts of Marxist-Leninist theory. Essentially, to picture the social development of society as a reflection of the masses is idealism, this is the type of idealism that Marx specifically addressed.
17 March at 21:10 · Like

Ben Wilson Okay who is Zulu? I can’t see any of his comments must be some guy that has me blocked.
17 March at 21:10 · Like · 1

Gordon Copeland You’re still picking quotes out of context but now you’ve misunderstood Marx in an entirely new way. Now you’re basically expressing a form of confused economic determinism to attack a strange, outlandish strawman.

This sort of understanding comes out of a confused reading of the preface to ‘Contribution to Political Economy’ and is fairly common amongst Marxists who succumb to dogmatist and inflexible understandings of Marxist theory.

You are doing the same thing that under-read Marxists do constantly, where they investigate a subject sloppily and lazily and only try to understand something to the extent that they can refute it, without developing the fundamental principles of Marxism which allow us to critically consider things without succumbing to deviations.

The basis of what you are misunderstanding is that you think that all social change viewed through the Juche Idea is that of some idealist abstract idea based around “man’s independence”, which is fundamentally not true and definitely not what I expressed above. What the Juche Idea disagrees with, similar to other Marxist philosophies which opposed economic determinism (a dogmatic and, frankly, silly idea), is the notion that all change is driven by the economic base of human society. Instead, the superstructure and the base are dialectically linked and they work together to influence human society. Thus, man’s conscious and creative actions do contribute to pushing him forward towards independence.

After all, if Marx thought that only the base of society mattered, then why would he have agitated and worked for the revolution? His own conscious efforts would not have mattered!

Basically, you have to participate in the revolution for there to even BE a revolution.

In the Juche Idea, man is not considered as an individual abstraction. You are purposefully slanting your quotes and understanding to attack a strawman. The Juche Idea as you seem to misunderstand it is literally contradictory to itself, since you claim that it is both “developed by the subjective inclination of a leader (great man theory of history)” and “socialism centered on the masses”.

Also, the quotes you keep using (devoid of notes from where they came from), are ripped straight out of their context and are purposefully misunderstood in bad faith. This isn’t high-school debate club, that shit isn’t going to fly. If we’re looking to understand a topic instead of just maintain our ideological purity, as Marx did in his studies, we have to digest it and fully understand it first. You pretty clearly aren’t trying to do this.

Are you ready to approach this topic as a student yet?

An attribute I really respect in Marxists is humility and a thirst for knowledge. I see it rarely nowadays.

Honestly, you expressed other things in your post but I couldn’t even engage with them since the Juche Idea DOESN’T EXPRESS THEM OR ADVOCATE THEM.
17 March at 22:09 · Edited · Like · 4

Gordon Copeland Honestly, I had to read your post at least a dozen times because it was so confusing how you came to the conclusions you did.
17 March at 21:54 · Like · 1

Gordon Copeland I’m still not sure entirely what the hell you think the Juche Idea is.
17 March at 21:55 · Like · 1

Inuromaru Kusoraki All i see is beauty not censorship then again that’s all i see in these communist countries in Asia
17 March at 23:09 · Edited · Like · 3

Kyle McGeehan From what little I’ve read so far, the Juche Idea seems like a consistent elaboration of Marx’s own writings on human beings. You could bend and muddle the terms until it all appears idealist, but the essence reminds me of this passage from Capital:

“By thus acting on the external world and changing it, [man] at the same time changes his own nature. He develops his slumbering powers and compels them to act in obedience to his sway…What distinguishes the worst architect from the best of bees is this, that the architect raises his structure in imagination before he erects it in reality. At the end of every labour-process, we get a result that already existed in the imagination of the labourer at its commencement. He not only effects a change of form in the material on which he works, but he also realises a purpose of his own that gives the law to his modus operandi, and to which he must subordinate his will.”

Not so revisionist after all.
17 March at 23:18 · Like · 7

Vika Sinclair Nice observation comrade^
17 March at 23:19 · Like · 4

Gordon Copeland I concur, this is a good connection to make and encapsulates a lot of what the Juche Idea expresses about man’s transformation of nature and society through his creative and conscious labor.

Chevy Phillips Adjowa Fuji Deva — No Adjowa, I am not attacking ppl for having a “different vision”, I’m attacking people for littering threads like this one with imperialist garbage.
20 March at 04:35 · Like · 1

Chevy Phillips William Alumbaugh — what a surprise, I get called a tankie by someone who, like Adjowa, disappears from the thread when a well informed person like Gordon Copeland comes along to challenge what he rightly described as “hate speech”. People like you come on this page with your Orientalist, patronising tripe about “state capitalism”, “totalitarianism” and all the rest Fox News talking points, but you have nothing to say when someone like Gordon comes along and slaps down all the pro-imperialist insults to DPRK. You should all be totally ashamed of yourselves for parroting your own ruling class. I’m embarrassed to have the name “communist” associated with such people.
20 March at 04:39 · Like · 5

Babssaid,

Anyone who takes them to task is denounced as a liberal/social democrat/anti-communist and then banned. If you present them with evidence then it’s dismissed as Western funded propaganda.

” I’ll defect to the DPRK in a heartbeat. Working in a collective farm and coming home early to my lovely family without a worry about healthcare or rent or paying for school tuition would be real swell.”

What planet are these guys living on. This is a religious fundamentalist level of ignorance and stupidity.

Babssaid,

Rune Agerhus
Found this, while reading about North korea. It is allegedly a quote by the East German embassy in DPRK, criticizing “the lack of ideological correctness in North Korea”.

“Party propaganda is not oriented toward studying the works of Marxism–Leninism, but rather is solely and completely oriented toward the “wise teachings of our glorious leader, Comrade Kim Il Sung”. Many rules of Party life, such as the link to the masses, are portrayed as if they were discovered by Kim Il Sung rather than by Marx, Engels, and Lenin.”

At some point i agree with this, but what do you guys think?
Like · · Share · 19 March at 14:11
Brendan Campisi likes this.

Gordon Copeland … So is the criticism that they didn’t name drop enough?

This isn’t a criticism, this is whining about wording shit differently.

Can you source this?
19 March at 14:57 · Like · 1

Gordon Copeland For the record, I read some of their curriculum, they do teach Marxism-Leninism.

They just value their own teachings and theories, none of which contradict or revise the basic foundations of Marxism-Leninism.
19 March at 15:14 · Like · 1

Rune Agerhus The only source i have is Wikipedia..

Could be written by capitalists.
19 March at 15:15 · Like

Gordon Copeland Wikipedia usually sources claims and the ones that aren’t sourced you should generally take as being false.

Check the sources at the bottom of the page, it’s not from a book or article or text?
19 March at 15:17 · Like · 2

Wilson Center Digital Archive
digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org
Foreign Policy and International19 and 22 March 61Relations DepartmentBerlin, 14 March 1961ConfidentialDemocratic People’s Republic of KoreaInformation on a few problems in the Korean Workers Party and in the Democratic People’s Republic of China.(Prepared by the embassy of the GDR in the DPRK)Addre…
19 March at 15:18 · Like

Rune Agerhus That is it!
19 March at 15:18 · Like

Gordon Copeland This document is amusing as a demonstration of petty sectarianism and is understandable if you note that, while the DPRK tried to avoid the Sino-Soviet Split and the ensuing sectarianism which became rampant around that time, it sided much more firmly in the ideological camp with the PRC, often slyly insinuating that the Soviet Union and, by extension, the GDR were following the revisionist path.

The complaints become amusingly nonsensical regarding the Korean War and their nationalism, which remains a form of progressive anti-imperialist nationalism focused on their own efforts instead of playing follow the leader with the Soviets. In all honesty, the aid from the Soviets was massively dwarfed by the efforts of the Korean revolutionaries and especially by the aid from the PRC.

This document is a fascinating and interesting example of the many ideological problems with the GDR, whose party functionaries often slavishly followed the Soviets even as they began to backpedal from the dictatorship of the proletariat during the tenure of Khrushchev and the leaders who followed after him, while the DPRK firmly rejected this line and established closer ties with Mao Zedong.

Their complaints about Kim Il-Sung echo Khruschev’s slanders against Stalin, pointless and vague accusations of “personality cults” and the like.

Overall, not too much to engage with seriously, but an interesting look into history.

Generally, I wouldn’t take this too seriously. It didn’t really affect policy and was basically sectarian potshots, common from this era amongst the socialist nations. Nothing serious came of it and none of its criticisms are really solid or worth much consideration.

Amusing, though. Thanks for showing it to me.
19 March at 15:36 · Like · 2

Rune Agerhus You are more than welcome, Comrade Gordon
19 March at 15:37 · Like · 1

Daniel Sullivan Yeah… The bottom line… Where is the DDR today? Objection conditions for the DPRK have been far worse, yet they’ve managed to weather them. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
19 March at 17:30 · Like · 1

Chevy Phillips This criticism is pretty mild. No big deal.
20 March at 04:25 · Like · 3

But how much similar garbage have I heard verbally in left meetings over last 35 years?

Although then you had to leave your house and interact with real human beings to be able to sing the praises of Stalin and Mao and Kim Il-Sung – now anyone with a laptop can just deposit these steaming mind turds onto the internet with no effort at all.